Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Age!

September 1, 2013

Age is the newest talking point from conservatives and the Republican party. They are talking about an interesting and overlooked fact about the historical figures at the founding of America....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(56)

USABorn

Sep-01-13 1:50 AM

What is it with "Reeder's Rants" ltes, that you can tell he wrote them within the first couple of sentences?

He is fast becoming a laughing stock among readers with a brain. (Of course this doesn't include any liberals who might attempt to read his rants!)

You would think he would hide his ignorance instead of displaying it for all to see.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Sep-01-13 4:04 AM

First of all, life spans weren't as long back in the 1700's as they are now. All that new-fangled medicine and all has extended life spans.30 may have been considered middle -aged or older back then. As far as what i look for in a President, age isn't a deciding factor. Experience, conviction, honorable background and common sense is.( I know, it's alot to ask for these days) Advanced age doesn't always mean wisdom .

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Sep-01-13 4:07 AM

"Age is the newest talking point from conservatives and the Republican party."

It is?

13 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Sep-01-13 4:46 AM

Well Ritty, it was a subject at the Central Penn Community Proboard. That site that Chuck never goes to. Ooops, cat's outta the bag.

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Sep-01-13 5:29 AM

Mike, you are exactly right. I was searching the internet trying to find this conservative "talking point" and could find it no where until you sent me in the right direction. And what do you know... there is a thread there started by Gavin called How Old Were Our Founding Fathers. Congratulation Gavin, you are the new talking head for the Conservative party nationwide.

Chuck, when you see a posting on this website you don't agree with, instead of just stalking, chime in with your disagreement directly to Gavin, instead of writing another letter to the editor where no one knows what the heck you are talking about. You tried to make it look that this is some major discussion going on in the Republican Party in an attempt to get their younger leaders a presidential election. Very misleading and it smacks of deception.

12 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 6:52 AM

The funniest thing, Todd Andrlik is a historian, not a political hack. He runs a website called "Journal of the American Revolution" (allthingsliberty) to "publish passionate, creative and smart content intended to make history more palatable. Our editorial menu offers a healthy variety of in-depth features and engaging columns, in both short- and long-form, with an eye for accuracy over legend. Our daily goals are simple: Make serious history more approachable among a diverse audience and regularly deliver original, unique and interesting material to our readers. It’s edutainment, or a business casual approach to scholarship, if you will."

Mr Andrlik's "history-related work has appeared in Patriots of the American Revolution, Huffington Post and Boston Globe as well as NPR, C-SPAN, CNN, Mount Vernon, American Revolution Center, Old State House and Fraunces Tavern Museum."

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Sep-01-13 7:08 AM

Gavin, I think you should write a letter pointing out the glaring deception that Reeder was attempting to accomplish. To take your post on that forum about a historian and twist it like he did, making it appear that it's some type of conservative conspiracy, just highlights the measures he will go to point fingers.

11 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Sep-01-13 7:13 AM

I know one thing, there is no way I could ever post in this forum again if I pulled a stunt like this and got caught. Reeder better be prepared to defend himself. I never gave much credit to any of his letters and comments to begin with and this is just icing on the cake.

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Sep-01-13 7:20 AM

"The right is even discussing a way to allow Ted Cruz to qualify the office of President even though he was born in Canada and not in the US and did not move to America until he was 3 or 4 years old." Cruz, like Obama is a dual citizen. Obama British/American and Cruz Canadian/American, constitutionally neither is eligible to hold office higher than a Senator. But, since too many people do not understand what "natural born citizens" actually means, we have a precedence that has been set by Obama and the Dems. Since the Constitution has no meaning today to either party and to most Americans, I'd say Cruz can run.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 7:22 AM

The book he is talking about by Andrlik is "Reporting the Revolutionary War: Before It Was History, It Was News".

A review by Rebecca Vnuk, "There are few ways for us to document life during the Revolutionary War. The era was before photography, and written primary sources often focus on battles far after the events occurred. This volume gives a snapshot view of the course of the war and of daily life in general. Andrlik, a noted newspaper archivist, shares an extensive collection of rare newspapers, from 1763 to 1783, as well as 60 essays contributed by Andrlik and 37 historians. An associated website,beforehistory dot com, features a digital archive and educational material. History buffs and students will find much to enjoy in this attractive and informative book. Recommended for all collections."

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 7:23 AM

...and just one more quick point, the ages are not listed in this book. That was a separate article written by Andrlik.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Sep-01-13 7:24 AM

I would vote for a Cruz or Paul at any election, over the likes of a Biden or God-forbid another Clinton.

10 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 7:25 AM

Cap, I do not know if I will write a reply or not. Chuck made so many unfounded assumptions (I know, imagine that), that I do not even know where to start.

9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 7:26 AM

"Reeder better be prepared to defend himself." - Capricorn1

Good luck with that one. Let me know how you make out.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Sep-01-13 7:34 AM

With this letter, Chuck has advanced from liberal to psychotic. Almost nothing in this letter is true, but I'm sure that he believes every words. Please, if you know Chuck personally, please get him some professional help. I used to laugh at his ranting, but this is no longer funny. This man is in a desperate state. Sad, very sad indeed.

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Sep-01-13 7:42 AM

Enigma, He stated once that he has "many" people that come up to him patting him on the back and thanking him for his letters, and asking him to continue writing. So, as a result of that one homeless man that was delusional and giving him accolades when Chuck gave him a quarter, he feels he has a following that are hanging on to his every word and waiting for the paper to arrive to read his drivel. It's his own little cult in his own little mind.

11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Sep-01-13 7:44 AM

Born in Canada to an American mother, Ted Cruz became an instant U.S. citizen. “Senator Cruz became a U.S. citizen at birth, and he never had to go through a naturalization process after birth to become a U.S. citizen,” said spokeswoman Catherine Frazier. “To our knowledge, he never had Canadian citizenship.” The U.S. Constitution allows only a “natural born” American citizen to serve as president. Most legal scholars who have studied the question agree that includes an American born overseas to an American parent, such as Cruz.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Sep-01-13 7:51 AM

When did Chuck move to Morrisonville?

Man, I could parody that one (biting tongue).

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Sep-01-13 8:01 AM

Sorry Mike, but I will agree to disagree with you on this. "The Dallas Morning News says that I may technically have dual citizenship," Cruz continued. 'Assuming that is true, then sure, I will renounce any Canadian citizenship. Nothing against Canada, but I'm an American by birth and as a U.S. senator, I believe I should be only an American." Cruz will have to explain in writing why he doesn't want to be Canadian, fill out a four-page form and get clearance from Canada's spy agency, according to Reuters. The process could take up to eight months."

Now if there is no dual-citizenship with Canada why go to the trouble of renouncing what is not true? Smells to me like a skunk hiding in the wood pile!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Sep-01-13 8:12 AM

Most legal scholars do not agree on the meaning of "Natural Born Citizen".

In Inglis v. Trustees (1830) and Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the plaintiff was born in the United States, of a father owing allegiance to a sovereignty other than the United States. In each case, the Court determined that the plaintiff did not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth: his nationality at the time of birth was that of his father, not his birthplace"

To this day, whenever an Opinion of the Supreme Court has referred to an individual as a "natural born citizen", the individual was always born in the United States, of U.S.-citizen parents. The Supreme Court has never, in any of its majority opinions, used the term "natural born citizen" in reference to someone whose parents were not both U.S. citizens.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-01-13 8:19 AM

"What a change in tone from the right wing." - Charles M. Reeder

*

I think it's (more) a matter of them "changing their tone"...all-the-TIME!!!

*

See:

Axis Of Ignorance; Headlines

2 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JerryfromRI

Sep-01-13 8:26 AM

"The right is even discussing a way to allow Ted Cruz to qualify the office of President even though he was born in Canada "

--

His mother is an American citizen, that makes him an American citizen regardless of where he was born.

Period.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JerryfromRI

Sep-01-13 8:29 AM

Martin Luther King Jr. was 34 years old when he gave the "I have a dream" speech.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Garben78

Sep-01-13 8:37 AM

Man reeder your wife or life partner she or he must be real lonely with you sitting in front of the computer

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CaveFelem

Sep-01-13 8:40 AM

Joe Biden as president. If nothing else, that should provide some comic relief.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 56 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web